Your view on Hydra-Shok ammo?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Rampant_Colt said:
Gold Dot bullets are plated, not bonded..
Click to expand...

Speer Gold dots are bonded. Here is a link, though there are tons of other sources and I'm surprised you were not aware.

http://www.speer-ammo.com/products/gold_dot_prsnl.aspx

An excerpt:

"Gold Dot was the first high-performance handgun ammunition to be loaded with true, bonded-core bullets. Using our exclusive Uni-Cor® process, we bond the jacket to the core one molecule at a time. This virtually eliminates core-jacket separation, the leading cause of handgun bullet failures and often inherent in the design of conventional bullets."
 
Nope, the copper is electro-plated onto a lead core like cheap jewlery. They vary the lead hardness and copper thickness based on the bullet's intended velocity window

Uni-Cor technology bonds an incredibly uniform jacket to the core—one molecule at a time
Click to expand...

http://www.speer-ammo.com/products/gold_dot_const.aspx

"one molecule at a time" is fancy-shmancy jargon for an electro-plating process. Uni-Cor was the original name of Gold Dot bullets back in 1991-'92 before being changed to Gold Dot, and is a process CCI/Speer uses to manufacture TMJ and Gold Dot bullets. Maybe I'm splitting hairs here
 
I'm still seeing bonded.

Frankly I've been active on gun boards since 2005 and you are the first person to ever claim Gold Dots were not bonded. Also, I've come across a fair amount of tests and real world results with Gold Dots and their performance indicates that they are in fact legitimately bonded.

My technical knowledge does not allow me to fully appreciate your post or its implications at this time.
 
I like the Hydra-Shok.

I've got about 400 rounds of Federal Hydra-Shok ammo in the 230 grain .45 ACP version. It functions well in all the autopistols I carry for defense. It shoots well in all the autopistols I carry for defense.

Even if it 'clogs' and fails to expand, it's still as useful as G. I. hardball. I see no reason to shoot it up just because and purchase new ammo just because it's 'new'.

Okay, if I had none, what would I select? As mentioned, all the premium HP ammo varieties are all pretty good. I'd probably buy a box of each and see which brands function in my pistols, and secondarily, how they group. First preference is the best functioning, tie breaker is accuracy.

The man with the double barreled shotgun; how many layers of clothing to penetrate? None. From that angle, I'd put the first round just above the muzzles of that shotgun. I'm a pretty simple guy.
 
Archie: I don't think most of us count on being able to make a one shot headshot on an attacker coming at us with a shotgun in a real life scenario. Most of us are not that exceptionally skilled.
 
I like 'em. Does it have shortcomings? Absolutely and especially if you shop for data to support a particular scenario.

That said, I can't imagine a load which everyone agrees is best.


For me;

H-S has proven to be dead reliable regardless of storage or length of carry time

It has flat sent coyotes, a couple of feral dogs and a white tail in North Cackolakee straight and dramatically off to the big adios.

Feeds - so far - in absolutely everything I've run it through.
 
I like them.

I bought them in .357, 45ACP, 380 and 44 mag way back when.

44's open up way too fast for deer sized game. I switched to a 240 softpoint , then a 300gr softpoint.

in 45 ACP the 'older' design shot really well but loading and unloading I got bullet set back. Changed that by making my 'house' gun a 45 ACP revolver. I've shot one into game before, results were impressive.

Saw a 158 gr 357 hydrashock switch off an elk with a coup de grace.

In 90 gr .380 the hydrashock opens up way to fast.

Guess I've had mixed results. I decided the 380 didn't have mass to go deep if it was expanding as soon as it hit bone. 357 and 45 didn't seem to have that issue. I had fired the 44 into clay and it blew up--not what i wanted in a pistol I was carrying as a 'short rifle' in deer season.

It's an old design, but it works.
 
C0untZer0 said:
Having said that, when tested in media, the Ranger T looks very cool with the little claws and everything, Hydra-Shok with it's limp thingy kind of hanging over... not so much.

attachment.php
Click to expand...

Viagra anyone?

The Hydra Shock is a proven SD round. It will get the job done but as always there maybe better options out there.

I use them and like them, I also live in Florida and don't have to deal with heavy winter clothing for a very long time.

Friends and family living up north still have a summer carry round (124gr Hydra Shock) and a heavier winter carry round (147gr HST).
 
I've been using Hydra's for years now. Before I used it in all calibers but these days it's mainly just .357 in my HD gun. Is there better ammo? Certainly but nothing wrong with the Hydra's.
 
If you are counting 4 layers of denim, but throwing an arm into the mix, you have created a different scenario. Flesh of an arm will start the bullet expanding, which changes the geometry of the round once it goes through another layer. 4-straight layers, lying parallel to each other, does not reflect clothing worn on a body, with strands going different direction from each other. A ballooned coat set in front of a layer of denim would potentially be a valid comparison. But even the bad guy in the picture, his layers are not adjacent to the point that they offer mutual resistance to a potential round. His arm would change any bullet that penetrated it. Nothing in that photo is representative of 4 layers of a reasonably tough material where each layer assists each other (as strands in a cable).

4 layers of denim cannot make any kind of claim to reality, unless the guy was wearing 4 pairs of jeans or 4 denim jackets.
 
I like Hydra-shoks. As an above poster stated, they have been very accurate and easy to shoot in both my 1911s and my Sig232. I have one pistol that doesn't like to load them reliably, and in that pistol I carry Golden Sabers. Also, as stated, most premium HPS are perfectly acceptable. As same poster stated, as soon as HST came along, HS was suddenly the red headed step child. I have some HST in .45, and it is fine, but will not be loaded in my carry 1911s until all my Hydra shoks are gone. Carry what you shoot well, otherwise the charecterisics of the bullet are for naught.
 
Nope, the copper is electro-plated onto a lead core like cheap jewlery.
Click to expand...
Is your contention that bullets perform better if made like expensive jewelry? (Is there a lot of cooper-plated lead jewelry somewhere I'm not seeing? ;))

Bullets ain't jewelry. The only thing that matters about the process by which Gold-Dots are made is whether it results in a well made bullet that performs well.

Like Gold-Dots! :)
 
Hydra-shok's are like wooden baseball bats. They ain't "bling" but they've gotten the job done for a loooong time.
 
None the forehead is exposed! By the way I am currently taking applications for test subjects to wear 4 layers of denim. The test will be to see if my 230 grain Hydro Shocks will penetrate enough to take the fight out of you. Winners will get a substantial cash reward. Any takers?
 
Last edited:
Straw Man Argument 101

Mike Faires said:
None the forehead is exposed! By the way I am currently taking applications for test subjects to wear 4 layers of denim. The test will be to see if my 230 grain Hydro Shocks will penetrate enough to take the fight out of you. Winners will get a substantial cash reward. Any takers?
Click to expand...
You're missing the point. The reason four layers of denim is used for ammo testing is to see whether or not the bullet will expand repeatedly after encountering these materials. Ammunition designed to meet the specifications as outlined by the FBI Ballistic Test Protocol is engineered to expand after encountering obstacles like plywood, automotive glass and sheet metal.


This is mentioned in my previous post on page 2
http://greent.com/40Page/general/fbitest.htm


I find it curious that people spend lots of money on what they personally consider to be their perfect defensive handgun, yet still use ammo with questionable attributes. Just because Hydra-Shok ammo is old doesn't mean it's good. W-W Silvertips have been around since 1979, does that make them the best choice? If there are better choices available that will expand after encountering a wider variety of obstacles wouldn't you rather use that?


Bullet R&D has evolved in the thirty years since those dated designs became available. Nothing is a sure thing. Prepare for the worst-case scenario, not ideal conditions. Have a back-up plan in order. Do you think the bad guy is going to stand still and let you take careful aim between his eyes? You may only get one shot off; make it count. This isn't a fairytale or after-school special that always has a happy ending. There are no magic bullets, but modern bullet designs will increase the odds in your favor.
 
We have some seriously skilled individuals in this thread. Congrats to the guys who can pull off quick life-or-death headshots.
 
Warp said:
We have some seriously skilled individuals in this thread. Congrats to the guys who can pull off quick life-or-death headshots.
Click to expand...
Body, body, head; body, body, head was what I was taught and practiced for years. I think maybe that's why B29 and similar silhouettes have heads, shoulders and bodies. But ... to each his own.
 
Rampant_Colt said:
You're missing the point. The reason four layers of denim is used for ammo testing is to see whether or not the bullet will expand repeatedly after encountering these materials. Ammunition designed to meet the specifications as outlined by the FBI Ballistic Test Protocol is engineered to expand after encountering obstacles like plywood, automotive glass and sheet metal.


This is mentioned in my previous post on page 2
http://greent.com/40Page/general/fbitest.htm


I find it curious that people spend lots of money on what they personally consider to be their perfect defensive handgun, yet still use ammo with questionable attributes. Just because Hydra-Shok ammo is old doesn't mean it's good. W-W Silvertips have been around since 1979, does that make them the best choice? If there are better choices available that will expand after encountering a wider variety of obstacles wouldn't you rather use that?


Bullet R&D has evolved in the thirty years since those dated designs became available. Nothing is a sure thing. Prepare for the worst-case scenario, not ideal conditions. Have a back-up plan in order. Do you think the bad guy is going to stand still and let you take careful aim between his eyes? You may only get one shot off; make it count. This isn't a fairytale or after-school special that always has a happy ending. There are no magic bullets, but modern bullet designs will increase the odds in your favor.
Click to expand...
Well said!
 
Some very interesting data here:
http://www.firearmstactical.com/ammo_data/ammodata.htm

Since the subject lends itself to the examination of old bullets vs. new ones, this data is still relevant. Hydra-Shok bullets are prominently featured along with Golden Saber, Gold Dot and some others. Obviously bullets developed after this data was compiled is not present. But we are talking about the old Hydra-Shok after all.

Just statistics for sure, but until a significant population volunteers to be the test group in a live wounding experiment all we have are numbers and old wives tales. And Massad Ayoob of course ... of course.
 
Statistics and plans go out the window when the first shot is fired. After that it is training and muscle memory, And yes, there are some here with the requisit training, ability and experiance to make 1 shot head kills, not the only way we were trained but always an option. And yes Virginia, there is a Santa Claus.
Nothing is perfect but if you prepare for the worst you may survive it. Remember statistics are someone else's experiance organized mathmatically.
Use what you are personally experianced and comfortable with. If you can afford to buy the flavor of the week and then expend at least 250 rounds to insure function and accuracy go for it. If however you have accumulated, used, and still retain several hundred rounds of an older design that has never let you down and is a proven fight stopper, why change.
But then I am an old fashioned guy. No wonder nines and tupperware guns for me. I am a 1911 kinda guy. Used one for for 28 years in the military never let me down and even when empty makes a heck of a slap jack up side the head.
 
I'm long out of police work and always considered a handgun to be what you used because you couldn't get to something better.... That said I always recommended to young officers that they carry the heaviest round possible in either Hydro Shok or Speer Gold dot ammo for their auto pistols (my last ten years there were so few revolvers in service that they were a rarity in my area -south Florida). That's also why I encouraged them to carry 40 or 45 if they had a choice since you could get the heaviest bullet weights in those sizes. I'm sure that there are probably even better rounds currently available but that's not why I'm speaking up on this topic. In real life on the street the circumstances you'll find on that one life/death incident are so un-predictable that nothing can really prepare you for what you'll be facing...or what ammo will be best for a given situation.

Like most I read all the literature, like the idea of a properly expanding round, etc. -but there's simply no substitute for a bullet that penetrates deeply enough that it will mess with the vitals that are deep within the core of your target. Remember that the old G.I. hardball 45 round has a long history as a terribly efficient man-stopper and it usually would penetrate a solid 18" with no expansion at all... Whether it expands the way you expect or not a heavy round that penetrates deeply will usually get the job done.

One of my officers had to fire a shot at almost point blank range with a 45 loaded with hollow points at an opponent seated in a car. That single round traveled through the car door, through the car seat, and pretty much right through the chest cavity, from side to side, of the offender. No, it didn't expand much at all, yes it did end the problem with one shot.
 
My technical knowledge is such that I cannot appreciate the nuances of other bullets outside of hydra-shok at this time.

At the end of the day, I believe that these work, and real world experience by plenty of law enforcement and civilians who have used these to stop threats back that belief up. I have no doubts that in controlled conditions you can find fault with them, but you know, just because it doesn't expand doesn't mean your not still creating a wound channel, and I think that point gets lost here. Humans are not a hard target. Bullets passing through the human body cause trauma, expanded or not.

Now, that isn't to say that there isn't a better option out there. I stick with these because I like them and am satisfied with them and because I don't think there is anything so groundbreakingly superior to cause a change.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

S
  • Locked
9mm hydra shok question
Replies
15
Views
3K
Zip06
Z
D
  • Locked
One Hydra-Shok, Six Ball
2
Replies
26
Views
3K
CWL
C
T
  • Locked
Ranger t or hydra shok .380 ammo
2
Replies
37
Views
4K
LongRider
L
H
  • Locked
What PD ammo for a Sig P230SL?
Replies
4
Views
562
MikeJ
M
G
  • Locked
Ruger LCP Not Loading Hydra-Shok Rounds
Replies
20
Views
4K
Elvishead
E
Back
Top